The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

How many orders market can absorb without making wild price fluctuations is what liquidity all about . Normally there is plenty of liquidity ( lots of limit orders both sell and buy definesthe order book ) at london open and daily 4 pm fix for most pairs .Today Mkt made its move in pre mkt session ie 0800 hrs (CET) time . Its market makers / dealers time when they sort out orders other than tokyo close . Most probably it was Market Order that did the trick and showed lack of liquidity . Market Order is an instant direct to execute order that sucked up whatever small bids were there at that time . Head of FX at Saxo Bank was also talking about lack of liquidity on Bloomberg .

Ha! Please tell me that is a joke. Just ask US ally Iraq about the security the US has offered them. The US isn't interested in peace or security except in those narrow domains that serve its interest. The US is the biggest destabilizing influence in the world today.

That was the original plan Hyper power obligations

Current world is not according to that plan It has turned upside down

Regions of anarchy and regions of order

The region of anarchy is increasing including economic instability currency etc.

The final outcome is a global economic collapse

Helsinki and yalta2 was beginning of restoring order in different regions Uncle cannot do it alone

India China has economic and political relationship which is making them uncomfortable

You can't put it beyond mere speculation.The Brit. intel org. is reputed to be better or at least the equivalent of the US's with its ability to eavesdrop onto any kind of digital conversation,email,plus other more traditional forms of intel. It's what has kept the Brits punching above their weight in intl. affairs.Knowledge of the EU's position on the divorce (whose negotiations are in shambles) is vital for "Mrs. T",to survive,as the dogs are snapping at her heels both from without and within her party.

EU fears its Brexit talks are being bugged by British secret agents trying to obtain sensitive files EU officials are said to fear British spies have bugged their Brexit meetings Peter Foster, europe editor15 AUGUST 2018 • 9:30PMThe European Union’s Brexit negotiators fear that they are being bugged by the British secret service after the UK obtained sensitive documents “within hours” of them being presented to a meeting of EU officials last month, The Telegraph understands.

A highly placed EU source revealed the security concerns as British negotiators were set to return to Brussels on Thursday to resume Brexit talks.

The two sides remain far apart on the key issues of customs arrangements and Ireland, with Latvia’s foreign minister warning on Wednesday that the risk of a ‘no deal’ outcome was now “50-50”.

The EU bugging fears were raised at a meeting in the European Council on July 13 by a top member of Michel Barnier’s...

Y. Kanan wrote:Ha! Please tell me that is a joke. Just ask US ally Iraq about the security the US has offered them. The US isn't interested in peace or security except in those narrow domains that serve its interest. The US is the biggest destabilizing influence in the world today.

That was the original plan Hyper power obligations

Current world is not according to that plan It has turned upside down

Regions of anarchy and regions of order

The region of anarchy is increasing including economic instability currency etc.

The final outcome is a global economic collapse

Helsinki and yalta2 was beginning of restoring order in different regions Uncle cannot do it alone

India China has economic and political relationship which is making them uncomfortable

The inevitable has happened. The biggest stock floatation in history has come to a screeching halt — officially and indeed, abruptly. Aramco’s initial public offering (IPO) that has been the talk of the town–or globe to be more precise – ever since it was hinted some two years ago by Prince Mohammad Bin Salman (MBS) of Saudi Arabia, has now been shelved. It is official.

The IPO was the centrepiece of Vision 2030 – the MBS flagship that was to wean Saudi Arabia off the oil income. Once the report was out, eyebrows were raised all around. In order to dilute the impact of the report, Saudi energy minister Khalid Al-Falih had to issue a statement underlining that the (Saudi) government was committed to Aramco IPO “at a time of its own choosing when conditions are optimum.”

MBS is facing hurdles on many fronts in his attempt to "modernize" Saudia ! First and foremost, the Saudi Work Ethic needs to be modernized IMO

Indeed the statement remains open to all sorts of interpretations.The IPO was doomed for failure from its very inception, many now assert. The first and the largest hurdle was the price tag on it. While announcing the offering some two years ago, MBS had put the value of Saudi Aramco at $2 trillion. Saudi officials hence hoped to raise a record $100 billion by selling a 5 per cent stake in the Saudi state oil company.

But markets were not convinced. Market valuation varied from $500bn to $1.5tr – at best. But if markets didn’t match the value of $2tr, MBS would lose face. He was not ready to accept it. Even politically, that could have been suicidal for him.

Like the Paki H&D, the "losing face factor" is a big thing in Saudi "culture" !

There were other issues too. Stock exchanges in financial centres including London, New York and Hong Kong have been vying to host the international tranche of the share sale. The prize was too big to ignore. US President Donald Trump weighed in with a call for Aramco to choose New York for floating its shares. Armies of foreign investment bankers and lawyers were put to work on the offering.

London was also vying for the slot. Prime Minister Theresa May was its chief saleswoman, personally lobbying Khalid al-Falih, during a visit to Riyadh. She pressed on him the merits of London’s expertise and deep, liquid markets. Officials within Saudi Arabia too differed on the choice. It was not a straightforward decision. Too many variables, including legal ones, needed to be considered before making a final move.

Moreover, to generate genuine, international interest in the IPO, Aramco needed to open its books further. Riyadh definitely took some steps to convince potential. In order to make it palatable to money markets, taxes on Aramco were reduced from 85pc to 50pc.

In spite of these so called "reforms" , Saudi Arabia remains a "family kingdom". The various Princes take a personal cut of the oil sales revenue before it is deposited into State Treasury . The State "borrows" from the wealth of the Royal Household when it faces a financial crunch. There is no separate distinction between State Funds and the Monies belonging to the Royal Family !

But despite all this, the entire process had many pitfalls. It was going to take its toll. Riyadh did not appear ready – to meet the demands of the potential investors. Yet, Saudi Arabia needs money to fulfil at least some of its financial commitments. To wean its economy away from oil, it wanted to invest in high tech sectors. Last week Tesla’s founder Elon Musk was reported as saying that the Public Investment Fund (PIF) of Saudi Arabia had enough money to take his company private. Besides others, Saudi Arabia is also committed to a $45bn agreement to invest in SoftBank’s Vision Fund.

Saudi State and Saudi Princes promise "everything". As anyone, who knows the Saudis , the "check is in the mail" story is very common there !

Aramco IPO was to take care of some these needs. Now that the IPO has been shelved, the issue is where the money is to come from.Other avenues are now being tapped. Saudi Aramco is buying controlling stake in the Saudi petrochemical giant Sabic, for as much as $70bn.

In order to finance Sabic purchase, Aramco will need to raise funds from banks and international bondholders. This money will then go into PIF, which currently owns a 70pc stake in Sabic. PIF was initially expecting the money through Aramco IPO. It would still get at least a part of the anticipated money, but not through the IPO, but rather by selling its controlling stake in Sabic.

The main difference would be the origin of cash: rather than equity investors, it would come from bank loans and bond investors. The plans for a bond, likely to be combined with banks loans, are still at a preliminary stage, it now seems, but it would solve one key problem — it won’t put a value on the company and MBS will not be needed to swallow his words — at least for now.

Here is a 5 part series from WIRED on Israeli attempt at transforming the region (including Palestinians) into a technology and innovation hub. Covers Israeli Silicon Wadi (valley) and more... From 2017, so I hope it is not duplicate.

The world today is not converging around liberal democratic government, as it seemed to be for more than a generation. The Third Wave of democratization that Huntington himself observed progressed in the period from the mid-1970s to the mid-2000s from about 35 electoral states to perhaps 115 by 2008. But since then the wave has gone into reverse, what Larry Diamond has labeled a democratic recession.[1] Not only has the number of democracies declined somewhat, but important qualitative changes have taken place. Big authoritarian powers like Russia and China have grown self-confident and aggressive. Meanwhile, existing liberal democracies have lost much of their appeal after the financial crises in America and the Eurozone during the 2000s, and are suffering from populist uprisings that threaten the liberal pillar of their political systems.

In place of the Left-Right ideological split defined largely by issues revolving around the relative economic power of capital and labor in an industrialized setting that characterized 20th-century politics, we now have a political spectrum organized increasingly around identity issues, many of which are defined more by culture than by economics narrowly construed.Huntington was very prescient in his depiction of “Davos Man,” the cosmopolitan creature unmoored from strong attachments to any particular place, loyal primarily to his own self-interest.

Would America be the America it is today if in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries it had been settled not by British Protestants but by French, Spanish, or Portuguese Catholics? The answer is no. It would not be America; it would be Quebec, Mexico, or Brazil.[4]The Third Wave chronicled the rise of liberal democracies around the world following the fall of the Berlin Wall. But a cultural argument was embedded here as well: According to Huntington, the democratic wave was not based on broad acceptance of a set of universal values around democracy, but rather on the fact that the new democracies in Latin America and Europe had a Christian—indeed, often a Catholic—cultural background. What had changed, according to Huntington, was the Catholic Church’s reconciliation with modern democracy after Vatican II, which then permitted countries from Hungary and Poland to Argentina and Brazil to accept democracy as a form of government.

one of the most salient cases of assertions of identity leading not to civilizational solidarity but to endless fractionalization is the United States. Identity politics took hold in the United States in the wake of the social movements of the 1960s, in which African-Americans, women, the disabled, indigenous Americans, gays, and lesbians all came to feel that they had experienced discrimination and marginalization in distinctive ways. The different “lived experiences” of each group led some to assert that those who were not members of the group could not even begin to sympathize with its struggles. There was the constant emergence of new identities: not just gays and lesbians, but transgender and intersex people; “intersectionality” appeared with the realization that overlapping categories of marginalization led to the creation of entirely new identities. In both the United States and Europe, the Left which had been built during the first part of the 20th century around working class solidarity came to embrace these new identity groups, even though this tended to alienate older working class voters.

The emergence of modern China does not violate this pattern: Chinese society in many ways looks very similar today to that of earlier modernizers in being urban, industrial, with social hierarchies built around education and acquired skills, in which women are slowly displacing men in an increasingly service-based economy.

War has broken out in the English Channel,not between the barbaric Bolshies and Brittania,but between the naval (fishing) forces of perfidious (Britannic) Albion and the Gauls! In the climate of Brexit,the gauntlet has been thrown over the gunwhale and they're off waging war at sea for the sake and honour of er....scallops! In the first skirmish,the French flotilla outnumbered the royal bumboats,sending them scurrying back to British beaches in retreat!The royal motto was spied inscribed upon a British bumboat.."he who flies and runs away,lives to flee another day!"

French and British fishing boats clash in scallop war skirmishStones thrown in protest over ‘pillaging’ as French fishermen claim no-deal Brexit would solve the problem

Sarah Marsh and agencyWed 29 Aug 2018 T

'Scallop wars' escalate as boats ram each other in Channel – videoFrench and British fishing boats have clashed in the English Channel in a row over scallops, with stones thrown and boats rammed at each other in a row over the prized shellfish.

The clash broke out on Tuesday morning as an estimated 35 French boats appeared to surround five British vessels leading to an angry standoff.

The row is part of a long-standing battle over scallop fishing, with the French accusing British boats of over-fishing off the coast of Normandy. They say they are trying to protect a scallop bed.

The skirmish took place more than 12 nautical miles out to sea. Under EU law, the British are not allowed to fish within 12 miles of the French coast but they can dredge for scallops in the 40-mile stretch of international water known as the Baie de Seine – while the French have access only from November to February.

French fishermen threw smoke-bombs and hurled insults at British rivals, with British fishing boat workers demanding the government intervenes, calling for navy protection.On Tuesday morning, British boats were heavily outnumbered, according to maritime official Ingrid Parot, and were eventually chased from the scallop-rich waters of the Baie de Seine area.

“The French went to contact the British to stop them working and they clashed with each other. Apparently there was stone-throwing, but no injuries,” said Normandy fishing chief Dimitri Rogoff.

Rogoff said about 40 French boats had gathered overnight in protest at British “pillaging” of the scallop supply.

Fishermen warn against carve-up of UK waters in Brexit deal

Footage from local TV channel France 3 Normandie showed boats being rammed and holes in three vessels as the French fishermen threw smoke-bombs at their British rivals.

“We are advising all parties to be calm as from the video clips some vessels are manoeuvring very dangerously,” Barrie Deas, the chief executive of Britain’s National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations, told Agence France-Presse.

“We have raised the matter with the British government and asked for protection for our vessels, which are fishing legitimately,” he added. “The deeper issues behind the clashes should be settled by talking around the table, not on the high seas, where people could be hurt.”

Britain’s scallop fishing industry is worth about £120m a year and supports more than 1,200 jobs.

Tensions have been high between British and French fishermen over the issue for around 15 years, leading to angry disputes, which have been labelled “scallop wars”.

In 2012, tensions broke out in a dispute, known in France as La Guerre de la Coquille Saint-Jacques, when British and French fishermen clashed this time off the coast of Le Havre, France.

The two sides have reached annual agreements over the past five years, but according to Rogoff the French blocked a deal this year, saying they had had enough. “For the Brits, it’s an open bar – they fish when they want, where they want, and as much as they want,” he complained.

The problem had grown worse over the past 15 years as English, Scottish and Irish boats had increased their catches considerably, he added. “We don’t want to stop them from fishing, but they could at least wait until 1 October so that we can share.”

Norman fishermen say the British use bigger trawlers of 30 metres (98 feet) or more – roughly double the size of the French vessels, which use more artisan techniques.

Brexit is a red herring when it comes to the plight of UK fishermenJohn Lichfield

The biggest British vessels can freeze scallops on board. “Scallops are a flagship product for Normandy, a primary resource and a highly sensitive issue,” said Rogoff.

If Britain crashed out of the European Union next year without a deal, the problem would be solved for the Normans, he added. “After 29 March 2019, they would be treated as a third party and would no longer have access to these areas,” he said.

The pro-Brexit organisation Fishing for Leave, however, has denounced the “hypocrisy” of French fishermen, claiming that they have caught 60% of the fish in British waters over the past 40 years.

The Russian Black Sea Fleet has become a much different force in comparison to what it was just three years ago. Since 2015, the year the operation in Syria was launched, it has received 15 new ships, including two frigates and six conventional submarines armed with Kalibr cruise missiles. With S-400 and S-300V4 air defense systems, Krasukha-4 electronic warfare systems and shore-based anti-ship Bastion batteries deployed on the Syrian coast, the ships in Eastern Mediterranean operate in a relatively safe environment. Kalibr missiles have already been fired from frigates and submarines at terrorist targets in Syria.

Last July, a 15-strong Mediterranean Task Force was established to be based out of Tartus, Syria’s leased naval facility. The ships provide a buffer on the southern flank of NATO. Russia needs to counter aggressive activities of the bloc in the region, including the Black Sea. Maintaining robust presence in the Mediterranean is the best way to defend Russia’s Black Sea borders.

All southern Europe, including such NATO military assets as Allied Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy, Combined Air Operations Centers in Larissa, Greece, and in Poggio Renatico, Italy, Headquarters Allied Land Command and Air Power Command in Izmir, Turkey, NATO Incirlik air base in Turkey, Graf Ignatievo and Bezmer air bases in Bulgaria used by US Air Force as well as a lot of other key NATO defense infrastructure sites happen to be within the range of Kalibr missiles installed on the platforms patrolling the Mediterranean Sea. They’ll all be knocked out with first salvos in case a Russia-NATO war starts.

The Fleet’s operations are not limited to the Black Sea basin and the Mediterranean. It is on the way of transition from a green-water naval formation to a blue water force, demonstrating the Russian flag as the ships move beyond the Strait of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal on the way to the World Ocean.

The establishment of permanent naval presence in the region can be explained by a number of rational calculations. The Mediterranean Sea is Russia’s only exit to the open ocean for the Black Sea Fleet. The permanent presence is a logical step in view of Russia’s growing political influence in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

n the wake of the social movements of the 1960s, in which African-Americans, women, the disabled, indigenous Americans, gays, and lesbians all came to feel that they had experienced discrimination and marginalization in distinctive ways.

African-Americans "came to feel that they had experienced discrimination"!!!Only a moron utterly ignorant of American history could have penned such a line.

Huh? That’s not a typo. It’s one of the projections in a fascinating OECD paper sketching scenarios for the world through 2060. Other developments canvassed: China’s share of global output peaks in the 2030s and then declines while India’s slice keeps rising. Indonesia’s economy catches up to its population.

The forecast for the U.S. to outstrip China is not a prediction of any economic miracle in America — just an acknowledgment that China has set itself up for a brutal demographic collapse. Shortly after China overtakes the U.S. economy in size, all the legacies of the one-child policy coalesce as the society seriously ages, stalling out the Middle Kingdom’s expansion. The U.S. will face demographic challenges, too, but nothing like this.

Between 2030 and 2060, this paper projects, gross domestic product in the U.S. will grow at an average of just under 2 percent a year. Not too different from the past decade. China will expand an average of 1.8 percent a year, a smidge behind the U.S., but a vast change from the low double digits we’ve seen in recent decades.

The most important function of the OECD paper, by Yvan Guillemette and David Turner, is that it obliges us to consider what happens after tomorrow.

China’s economy is ascendant and will replace the U.S. as the largest around 2030. We’ve all heard that bandied around, so much that’s not seriously questioned. Then the story tends to stop. We don’t hear much about the next chapter. Kudos to the OECD duo for taking a crack at it.

^^I would be happiest person if that happens, esp the parts with regards to India and China. However, these articles should be taken with all the salt ever from Dandi. For they are one person's belief driven by prevailing set of opinions.

Ordinary people may not understand artificial intelligence and biotechnology in any detail, but they can sense that the future is passing them by. In 1938 the common man’s condition in the Soviet Union, Germany, or the United States may have been grim, but he was constantly told that he was the most important thing in the world, and that he was the future (provided, of course, that he was an “ordinary man,” rather than, say, a Jew or a woman). He looked at the propaganda posters—which typically depicted coal miners and steelworkers in heroic poses—and saw himself there: “I am in that poster! I am the hero of the future!”In 2018 the common person feels increasingly irrelevant. Lots of mysterious terms are bandied about excitedly in ted Talks, at government think tanks, and at high-tech conferences—globalization, blockchain, genetic engineering, AI, machine learning—and common people, both men and women, may well suspect that none of these terms is about them.In the 20th century, the masses revolted against exploitation and sought to translate their vital role in the economy into political power. Now the masses fear irrelevance, and they are frantic to use their remaining political power before it is too late. Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump may therefore demonstrate a trajectory opposite to that of traditional socialist revolutions. The Russian, Chinese, and Cuban revolutions were made by people who were vital to the economy but lacked political power; in 2016, Trump and Brexit were supported by many people who still enjoyed political power but feared they were losing their economic worth. Perhaps in the 21st century, populist revolts will be staged not against an economic elite that exploits people but against an economic elite that does not need them anymore. This may well be a losing battle. It is much harder to struggle against irrelevance than against exploitation.

The fear of irrevelence that harari talks about is indeed real but it is the fear of the sociologists against the technologists. Harari and his ilk of sociologists understand that the relationship between the two groups is tenuous at the moment with the technologists threatening to break away from such ground bounding sensibilities that the sociologists are wont to bandy about.

The revolutions in information technology and biotechnology are still in their infancy, and the extent to which they are responsible for the current crisis of liberalism is debatable. Most people in Birmingham, Istanbul, St. Petersburg, and Mumbai are only dimly aware, if they are aware at all, of the rise of AI and its potential impact on their lives. It is undoubtable, however, that the technological revolutions now gathering momentum will in the next few decades confront humankind with the hardest trials it has yet encountered.

Which is why Harari,a history professor understands the finer implications of technological progress....makes perfect sense.

AI frightens many people because they don’t trust it to remain obedient. Science fiction makes much of the possibility that computers or robots will develop consciousness—and shortly thereafter will try to kill all humans. But there is no particular reason to believe that AI will develop consciousness as it becomes more intelligent. We should instead fear AI because it will probably always obey its human masters, and never rebel. AI is a tool and a weapon unlike any other that human beings have developed; it will almost certainly allow the already powerful to consolidate their power further.

Here he progresses to unleash his inner sci-fi/horror writer, which may or may not be the level of understanding of the entire sociology class.The rest of the article details more of this infantile fascination with the artifishul interregens and how the layman should prepare for a revolt for his rights. Now this is the problem I have with sociologists, they all compare marx and smiths c*ck, their length, girth, pointedness, taste and spend their entire life forming groups to influence the viewpoint of others. The studies may be fascinating, I suppose, but they are hardly useful to human society at large, and can also be considered as a exhaustive debate on the best ninja turtle. Our sociologists too buy membership to one or the other opposing group, and instead of designing policies to help our own downtrodden, provide data points to a pointless feud.The other issue is about the authority of a sociologist to question the progress of the technologist. Technologists do not question the veracity of reports like "How the wrong size of bras led to the rise of the fourth wave feminists" or " How sindoor is the number one cause of womens death in a patriarchal society like caste ridden India". Why then should the sociologists intervene when bio technology and ai( the bogeymen to paraphrase harari's article) are progressing.Already, the retardation of hard sciences with touchy feely soft "sciences" has created a rights "first" society, and with the ever inward looking tendency of the sociologists will create a cloistered human mindset which would be our downfall.Now onto harari, his book sapiens was a fine read for the entire quarter that i read, but while it gave blows to christianity(primarily) and islam, dharmic religions sometimes, it had a glaring omission of judaism; surely harari must have heard about it, yet it is as if they do not exist or rather it was a history of humans belonging to all other religions viewed through judaism tinted glasses. In short, a biased book marketed as the history of humans.

Caspian Report on recent declines in emerging market currencies vis a vis USD...especially highlighting how Turkey may have been trapped with huge debt ($200bn??) due in 2019 which if not addressed can be a big problem for the Sultan. Looks like China has entered as usual with a helping hand. Same problem Europe had post WW-II when the huge post-war debt repayment became a problem when European currencies were weaker against USD, which then became circular.

Russia’s Orthodox Church said on Friday it would no longer participate in structures chaired by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, deepening a row in Orthodox Christianity over the Ukrainian Church’s bid to break away from Moscow’s orbit.

Probably last address by President of EU Commission Jean-Claude Juncker.

One quote..."By next year, we should also address the international role of the euro. The euro is 20 years young and has already come a long way – despite its critics.It is now the second most used currency in the world with 60 countries linking their currencies to the euro in one way or another. But we must do more to allow our single currency to play its full role on the international scene.Recent events have brought into sharp focus the need to deepen our Economic and Monetary Union and build deep and liquid capital markets. The Commission has made a series of proposals to do just that – most of which now await adoption by Parliament and Council.But we can and must go further. It is absurd that Europe pays for 80% of its energy import bill – worth 300 billion euro a year – in US dollar when only roughly 2% of our energy imports come from the United States. It is absurd that European companies buy European planes in dollars instead of euro."

Yes. Not important how the oil/gas is priced, but payment is desired to be in Euro (or Rupees etc). Theoretically, paying for other's efforts, property, services, or commodities using your money is dream come true. Unfortunately, EU being the largest consumer of energy products pays in someone else's currency is what Juncker is complaining about. Large trade surplus (150 billion+) has developed some bad habits. But it is changing at a very slow speed.

Europe's support of Eye-ran Noo-klear deal has created some interesting technical challenges. As Eye-ran gets cut off from SWIFT, it becomes a challenge for European firms to continue to do bijjness with eye-ran; thus a need for an alternative payment system, which rus and cheen would be very happy to support.

Neshant wrote:Saddam was taken out for suggesting Iraq accept payment in euros for oil.

Gaddafi for suggesting the payment be in a gold dinar.

Both the EUR & USD are free float currencies (and gold too is traded on the open market). The currency that you're using for any particular transaction is only as significant as the transaction/conversion cost to another currency.

Had Hussain or Gaddafi been using the 'threat' for anything more than rhetoric, they could have quietly instructed their respective central banks to initiate purchases of Euros or bullion or bonds or elbow grease. Every central bank engages in some hedging of its forex holdings, and the sums involved can be quite substantial for the larger ones. And just for proper perspective, compare the size of Iraq & Libya holdings to the size of the global currency market which engages in trades worth nearly $6 trillion everyday.

chanakyaa wrote:Probably last address by President of EU Commission Jean-Claude Juncker.

One quote..."By next year, we should also address the international role of the euro. The euro is 20 years young and has already come a long way – despite its critics.It is now the second most used currency in the world with 60 countries linking their currencies to the euro in one way or another. But we must do more to allow our single currency to play its full role on the international scene.

As far as the Euro has come, it still remains fundamentally flawed by virtue of being a product of the fundamentally flawed Eurozone. Any monetary integration without fiscal integration is bound to be problematic. And the Euroarea contains 19 different fiscal policies operating almost entirely delinked from the ECB's monetary policy. And that's without going into problems with labour mobility & fissiparous tendencies.

As long as those problems remains unsorted, all the hand-wringing in the world by the EU isn't going to help the Euro challenge the Dollar's preeminent status as a reserve currency.

Viv S wrote:As far as the Euro has come, it still remains fundamentally flawed by virtue of being a product of the fundamentally flawed Eurozone. Any monetary integration without fiscal integration is bound to be problematic. And the Euroarea contains 19 different fiscal policies operating almost entirely delinked from the ECB's monetary policy. And that's without going into problems with labour mobility & fissiparous tendencies.

As long as those problems remains unsorted, all the hand-wringing in the world by the EU isn't going to help the Euro challenge the Dollar's preeminent status as a reserve currency.

You may have a point with respect to Eurozone challenges, but why "monetary integration", "EU fiscal integration", and "labour mobility" matter for a non-EU country in its decision of what reserve currency to hold? It is irrelevant. Does Sri Lanka, for example, hold $6-8bn reserves (instead of Euro reserves) because it is concerned about lack of fiscal integration in EU or labour mobility, compared to US? Does KSA require dollar payment because it is worried about lack of fiscal integration in EU or labour mobility (assuming they understand what it means)?

Neshant wrote:Saddam was taken out for suggesting Iraq accept payment in euros for oil.

Gaddafi for suggesting the payment be in a gold dinar.

Both the EUR & USD are free float currencies (and gold too is traded on the open market). The currency that you're using for any particular transaction is only as significant as the transaction/conversion cost to another currency.

Had Hussain or Gaddafi been using the 'threat' for anything more than rhetoric, they could have quietly instructed their respective central banks to initiate purchases of Euros or bullion or bonds or elbow grease. Every central bank engages in some hedging of its forex holdings, and the sums involved can be quite substantial for the larger ones. And just for proper perspective, compare the size of Iraq & Libya holdings to the size of the global currency market which engages in trades worth nearly $6 trillion everyday.

The easy way to understand it is to understand tax collection. Tax collection is enforced under penalty of imprisonment to be payable *only* in the fiat currency that the govt/banks want to force society to use and none other. Laws are passed to legalize the extinction of debt in the fiat currency whether the lender agrees or not.

All this is to create the artificial seniority of the fiat currency's claim to value. No rational person would otherwise consider claims to wealth printed out of thin air and issued as currency to have any value.

The mere fact that oil must be purchased in dollars gives the dollar it's seniority. Buying oil in dollars and then converting dollars into euros does not change that seniority (i.e the initial demand for dollars)Buying oil in gold effectively makes all purchases of oil in dollars a measure of a unit of gold - effectively destroying the seniority of the dollar.

The whole point of enforcing the purchase of oil in dollars through threats of military force is to preserve the seniority of the dollar which is highly advantageous to the US but not to buyers. This seniority is artificial since no country would othereise want paper claims printed out of thin air. A huge portion of the value of the dollar comes from coercing countries to make their purchase of this strategic commodity in dollars.

Finally, enforcing the dollars exclusive useage for oil purchaeses effectively ensures the dollars preeminance in the purchase of not just oil but all global outout.

You can see then why it is in the interest of the US to ensure all oil purchases are made exclusive in dollars. What will break up the US-EU's alliance ultimately is the latter's refusal to support this seniorage believing they are merely paying a "tax" to the US with no equivalent benefits forthcoming.

chanakyaa wrote:You may have a point with respect to Eurozone challenges, but why "monetary integration", "EU fiscal integration", and "labour mobility" matter for a non-EU country in its decision of what reserve currency to hold? It is irrelevant. Does Sri Lanka, for example, hold $6-8bn reserves (instead of Euro reserves) because it is concerned about lack of fiscal integration in EU or labour mobility, compared to US? Does KSA require dollar payment because it is worried about lack of fiscal integration in EU or labour mobility (assuming they understand what it means)?

The intrinsic faults in the Eurozone matter because they are impact the financial stability of the economic union and by extension its currency.

Simply put, the US dollar is preferred over the Euro as a reserve currency because it is issued by a stronger and more stable economy.